Desjohnna: I’m representing the school
board. The school board is fighting because they think they should be
able to pray during football games and graduations and things like that.
We think that if you want to pray it’s your freedom of religion
to pray.

We had a packet that was about five or six pages and we had a lot of
information in it that we had to read through and pick out what would
be for our case and what would be against our case and get down to the
root of what the Constitution’s really trying to say and how we
could interpret that into our arguments. So it was processing all this
information.

I’m worried that I might not be able to defend my case as well
as I want to, that they might come at me with something that I’m
not going to be able to back up or that I haven’t thought they would.
I might get a little nervous then. But I pretty much think I have down
what I’m going to say and what they are going to come at me with.
I found a lot of good points that I could argue with, so I was feeling
really good about the case.

I had never argued before the Supreme Court before and I was real nervous
but I had to get my mind clear and read what I had down. When the family
side went up, I felt more confident about our case because I didn’t
feel like they really had a strong argument. In the end I probably was
wrong. The Supreme Court decided that the families had a stronger case.
I think they had one strong argument that since she said “in Jesus’s
name I pray,” she pointed out a specific religion and that does
go against the Lemon Test.

Destinee: It seemed like I was studying day
and night just trying to figure out how to present my case and make it
really good. What surprised me about the other side was that they came
back with things that had nothing to do with the case and I thought they
were going to be a little more prepared.

Two of the girls in the class have a way of thinking that because they’re
Christian it’s right for everybody else who is Christian to think
the way they do. I think that they both think so much alike because they
were brought up strictly Christian in different ways than I was brought
up as a Christian. They don’t understand anything that I say about
it. I am Christian but that doesn’t mean that it’s right for
[prayer] to be in a public school. I just get kind of angry at them because
it’s like, “Why don’t you understand?” It gets
frustrating. You try and listen but it doesn’t help when there is
so much bickering back and forth.

Ina: I think we’re learning ways to
look at different points of view because you can look at this case in
four different points of view and come out with something different.

I’m arguing with the school board. The problem is that a female
mentioned religion at the football game. We’re arguing whether she
should have said it while at school. I don't think that she really made
anyone feel bad by saying “In Jesus’s name I pray” because
she said “I” and didn’t say “we” or “you
have to.” She didn’t use any of those other words. So I think
she should have freedom of speech. They told her to write the speech so
why is there a problem now? I feel that she did the right thing. I don't
think that the Mormon family really should have [brought the case].

We’re going to cite the [case] from 1990 where they ruled that
you can have after-school sessions of religion, and the football game
was an after-school event. So we’re going to see how far we’re
going to get with that. [It will be a challenge] getting everyone to see
our side. Because by the family already winning this case twice and taking
it up a higher step, more people think we’re going to have a problem
getting people to agree with us.
Jesse: I was a lawyer for the family side. I just thought I had more arguments
on that one and I could back them up easier.

The first day, we [started] to get our arguments together and we put
our feet in the other people’s shoes, like the school board, and
looked at what they would use so we could look [at] how to back those
up and defend them. That’s kind of how we got a strategy to win.
I looked through the packet and highlighted lots of stuff and then we
went on the Internet and looked up previous cases about religion in school.

John: I’m an attorney for the family.
My preparation is going pretty well. We’re getting everything together
for tomorrow. I was listening to the Justices and it sounded like they
were in favor of the school board. They were saying that [the families]
could just get up and leave if they want to. But I feel pretty strong
about what we have to say tomorrow.

We’re going to surprise them in the beginning. We’re going
to go up there and say a little prayer of our own, only it’s going
to be different to show how the families felt. We’re going to say
“God bless all our players in Satan’s name we pray”
to show that that offends people. And I guess we’re just going to
go up and say the precedents from past cases and try to get in their shoes
and try to counter what they say.

Kaila: I’m the Chief Justice. I wanted
to be an attorney for the school board and there was no room. Ms. Borges
picked a number and we had to guess it and I just chose the highest number
and I got it. Everybody said I’d probably make the best Chief Justice
‘cause I was really open to everything. At first I thought the Chief
Justice chose who would win the case, but then I heard that you had to
vote and I was okay. It’s a hard job; it’s very hard and I
wouldn’t want to have it when I get older. I think I should have
done a lot more research and maybe studied it a little more.

In the beginning I was looking more on the family winning because I just
thought the families have good points. But then, when I read the background,
I was more for the school board. So I kind of changed my mind because
I didn’t see it as such a big deal as people made it to be. I didn’t
really agree on the respondents winning. I really wanted the plaintiffs
to win

I think it was really heated in there. Everybody was very passionate.
But I think at times they really mixed up their opinions with the facts.

Kurtis: I’m the captain of my team
so I’m like leading everything. I think it’s going great because
we have everything we need for tomorrow. I was kind of concerned because
we were saying what we were going to do and I think that the other team
was listening. But we got some new stuff. We’re going to throw some
curves at them that I don't think they’re ready for.

I really don’t like to do all that readin’ and writin’
but I figure if I want to be a lawyer, this is what it takes, so I might
as well get used to it and start practicing now. So I went home and I
looked on the Internet [for] some information that could be helpful in
our case. The Supreme Court hasn’t ever had a case like this, so
it was hard to find related cases in the same situation that they ruled
on. We just kept using 1963, when the Supreme Court decided that reading
a Bible off the intercom was unconstitutional.

My key argument is that we’re going to try to lead a prayer, but
not like a Christian prayer. I want to see how the other lawyers and the
judges feel about that, because that’s the same situation on the
football field. I’m trying to throw a little curve at the beginning
to hit them with the big thing so they’ll come out and prove I was
wrong. I think that [the other side] going first also gives us an advantage,
because whatever they say when they go up we can just think of a comeback
at that.

We were arguing the Lemon Test. The Lemon Test is basically like saying
that [the speech] has no religious purpose, or it doesn’t advance
religion, or it doesn’t prohibit a religion. They did not pass the
Lemon Test at all. They kept trying to say they’re right but you
can [only] do your religion as long as it doesn’t harm or harass
other human beings. That’s what they failed to realize.

I think the outcome is good. I was surprised that we had the same exact
outcome as the real case and I think in real life it will help a lot of
people not to be offended.

Thomas: I was a Supreme Court Justice. I
thought it was going to be boring, something that would be just for fun
or something. Sometimes I don’t even pay attention. The first day
I didn’t read some of the stuff but then I started reading more
and then I just got really into it at the end. I thought it would be a
little easier but it was fun as it got harder and harder.

Zev: It was fun doing it, a good way to learn
about the Supreme Court and it was fun being a judge, kind of hard, you
know, seeing what they go through every day. [I] thought it was a pretty
cool experience. I had to go over the Constitution a little bit, study
the case, find background information, and look at other stories that
had to do with that case. If I were to start over, I would probably look
over the case a little more and try and ask a little more questions and
be a little more involved in discussion.